In one of America's wealthiest suburbs, an unlikely band of drilling opponents helped drive away the world's biggest energy companies. Did they save the town or ruin it?

She worried that if the ordinance passed, neither XTO nor Chesapeake nor any other company would return, and that the greatest resource since Spindletop struck oil would go untapped here.

As the council members entered their votes into computers, the susurrus of whispered conversations quieted. The results were transmitted to a projection screen: 7-0 in favor of added restrictions on fracking in Southlake. It was a little after 11 p.m., and the city council had just approved one of the most comprehensive drilling ordinances in North Texas. Aalund and his cohort rose and made their way outside. So did Joe Wright and Jim Milner, old-time Southlake men — good ol' boys, some in town call them — who stood the most to gain. Neither would comment. Everyone seemed weary, by the late hour and by a resource that had caused so much rancor in a town so unaccustomed to it. Neither side was sure what they'd won, or even who'd won at all.

That much wouldn't be clear for a few weeks.

ZUMA Ralph Lauer/ZUMAPRESS.com

A natural-gas well, like this one in Weatherford, would have gone up 1,200 feet from the home of Southlake mom Kim Davis. Chesapeake Energy claims regulation championed by Davis kept the company out of the suburb.

"If you have to invest your millions — and we're talking tens of millions in many cases — in order to potentially be issued a permit by any city hall, they may still have the option to decline, whether through their zoning process or their special use process or whatever," says Julie Wilson, Chesapeake Energy's vice president for corporate development in the Barnett Shale. "Each city handles it a little differently. It's a pretty big risk to take if you can't meet that ordinance exactly the way it is.

"And then when you have made these investments and you're ready to move forward, and the ordinance changes, and now you can't meet the new ordinance requirement, you can see the conundrum there. You've proceeded forward in good faith thinking you were going to be allowed to develop your minerals and the ordinance changes."

The frustration in her voice was obvious, and though she tried to speak generally, it was clear she was talking about Southlake. But there is perhaps no better evidence of a suitor spurned than the industry shibboleth-laced letter she sent out to Chesapeake's Southlake lessors earlier this month:

Dear Mineral Owner:

The City of Southlake recently approved a new municipal ordinance regulating natural gas operation within the city limits. As a direct result of that ordinance, Chesapeake will not be seeking any permit approvals and will allow the last of our nearly 1,400 leases in Southlake to expire.

Although we appreciate the careful consideration given during the ordinance process, the City of Southlake placed unnecessary and restrictive conditions on doing business in their city, restrictions no other municipality has imposed.

Chesapeake has received a large number of calls from mineral owners asking if we plan to challenge the ordinance. Unfortunately, our answer is "no." With so many other attractive options in the Barnett Shale, and many cities either to work with natural gas producers to create jobs, increase tax revenues and support community development, we will simply shift our efforts elsewhere.

As shale plays in other parts of the country create a demand for our limited number of rigs, we must make difficult decisions about which areas to develop and which to forgo. On behalf of Chesapeake Energy, I am truly sorry that we don't have the opportunity to produce your minerals. We will continue to lead the path toward U.S. energy independence as we fuel the economic engine right here in North Texas.

Thank you,

Cordially,

Julie H. Wilson

It was a long way of saying: You just regulated yourselves out of the gas business. The question is whether Southlake can take at face value that assertion, that it had just denied itself a gusher of royalties that could buy new fire engines or new computers for the town's sterling schools. Or was it a low blow for the benefit of Chesapeake shareholders, dealt by a company that invested God knows how much into Southlake and got hosed not by regulations but by gas prices that had sunk as deep as the Ellenburger formation?

"I do know that many of the folks who received that letter, their leases already expired," Terrell says. "Like, a year and a half, two years ago. I'm not sure how much posturing that was versus reality."

But there was an inescapable truth in that letter: What happened at Southlake Town Hall was merely a symptom of the broader difficulties energy companies encountered as they sought to exploit shale gas in the suburbs and cities of North Texas. Instead of dealing with one or two ranchers, plus the Railroad Commission and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, they were dealing with both agencies, the ordinances of municipal governments and hundreds if not thousands of small landowners. Coupled with a glut of shale gas depressing the market, it acted to slow the breakneck pace of gas development or, in the case of Southlake, to bring it to a complete halt. Meanwhile, rig counts on the Barnett Shale have dropped to around 50, down from more than 200 in its 2008 heyday.

As of December 2011 Turley is attempting to back out of his suit seeking $10,000,000,000 against Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. (If Turley is doing this for his usual 33-40% contingency fee, then he stands to make some serious money on the backs of his clients.) However, recently filed court documents show that Turley may have committed yet another fraud upon a federal court (See http://Iran-Conoco-Affair.US) in basing his lawsuit on a questionable groundwater contamination report ("8/4/10 Test Results," Exhibit A to Plaintiff's Response to Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.'s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December 14, 2011). The report appears to have been generated by "TTI Environmental Laboratories" an Arlington company Texas Secretary of State records show forfeited its corporate existence on April 9, 2010, several months before it claims it took water samples for the tests on the Harris' property.

While Devon's attorneys should investigate and prosecute Turley's apparent fraud, recent cases against Turley and his cronies at Baron & Budd, P.C. (See http://TexasBarWatch.US) suggest that they will avoid the controversy and move on to the next case for which they can over-bill Devon shareholders.

Your article disgusts me. Your stereotyping of Southlake is no different than if I said Dallas was populated entirely by low-income minorities.

I don't have blonde highlights, don't have green eyes, don't have a soft voice, and don't drive an expedition.

I am a single mother struggling to put my kids through school here because it's a GREAT community to live in.

And if you think this town hasn't had it's share of recession impacts, you came in here with blinders on.

Many people in Southlake don't want the drilling because we've researched it and know how bad it is. Why don't you run a piece on the dozen or so families in Dimock, PA who have no water because of contamination from fracking AND the O&G gas company stopped delivering clean water to them?

Or go interview the families in the community in Flower Mound that make up 20% of all cancer cases in Denton County. Guess what that small community lives near...that's right, a drilling site.

"The women here often get together to play bunco in each other's living rooms and tennis at the country club..." WHATEVER...

What caused Google to ban your website? There are numerous factors that can trigger Google to either penalize your website by pushing it far down the line in the rankings, or to ban it entirely and remove it from Google, as well as other Google partner sites.

I cannot wait to move away from Southlake. Had I known this little place was populated mostly with yankees and born agains, we never would have bought a house here. Most of these moms who consider themselves "self taught petroleum engineers" can't even operate the Carroll school system's Skyward application to monitor their kid's progress in school, much less use Excel or Word. But if you want to have an extramarital affair, join a bible study class at Gateway or White's Chapel -- they all use the convenient excuse that the devil was trying to upset their wonderful life (time and time again).

Milner, Wright and Rucker are now living in a locale they couldn't have imagined twenty years ago.

Google Fracking then find the list of "some chemicals" that are pumped into the ground. Nasty, Nasty, Nasty stuff. The water that is being used is now polluted with those same chemicals. The energy companies are relying on our out of sight out of mind mentalities. There are places in the US where these chemicals are coming to the surface.

Those who are not informed, tend to favor the industry much like the banking industry. Loose regulations and only the industry makes the big money while those who sit at home with credit card debt jump at the prospect of a $75 a month check. In time, the true price will ask to be paid with our health and environmental costs. Then what?

Urban gas drilling is exploitation at its best. At an all-time market low, O&G gets to pay the mineral rights owner a pittance while exporting LNG at 3-4 times the US cost. They get to use our roads and tap into Atmos conveniently, while residents suffer the pain.

Way to go to Kim Davis (I too am a conservative, far-to-the-right Republican, but care more about the environment than money or politics); Auland, Diane Harris, et. Al. Of S.T.A.N.D.

Let's not forget that one site was approved in Southlake (under very questionable circumstances that residents legally challenged) The second site was not approved by a super-majority vote, meaning the vote was 5 councilmembers in favor 2 opposed. Those 2 councilmembers have taken the heat and have been threatened by those who were blinded by greed and a few paltry royalty dollars. XTO ultimately made the "financial decision" to leave Southlake because it wasn't worth it to drill one site. Simply put: XTO is a corporation concerned most with their bottom line...NOT being the "good neighbor" their ads like to exclaim.

It is not hypocritical to understand that this activity ~ drilling, fracking, compressor stations, gas gathering pipelines, all the infrastructure necessary to operate a shale gas industrial plant in our neighborhoods ~ is wrong. Shale gas drilling and fracking are wrong everywhere since all of it is creating major issues for our environment and the earth. We need to get off this fossil fuel train as soon as possible.

Give it a few more years, you'll be able to afford it. Just like what Bartonville has turned into, high dollar homes that are now worthless-to the point where quite a few of the homeowners simply left. You can't drive a block in Bartonville without passing a For Sale sign. Hmmm, I wonder why?

Maybe. But when you live in a neighborhood you don't have large acreage and you certainly don't want to have pad sites at the borders and entryways. "Mineral owners" with small acreage are definitely not the same as mineral owners with large parcels of land. But then the industry doesn't mind people thinking that no matter how much land they have they will "get rich." Southlake understood that early on. We should all have been so lucky. The large landowners in any city or town will be the ones the industry wants to lease first. Then they can influence the rest of the townfolk to get on board. Then they can move when they realize their land is ruined forever...leaving the mess for those who aren't as able to get out.

From my reporting, primi, I didn't see it break down so clearly between those with mineral rights and those without. Many of the younger folks with kids, as the story notes, own their mineral rights and were paid well -- though certainly not as much as Joe Wright and Zena Rucker, who are much bigger landowners.

Sorry, you are completely wrong. At the depth of the drilling in the Barnett Shale the chemicls will NEVER come to the surface. If you think so then why isn't the oil/gas coming to the surface? As far as the "bad chemicals" are concerned I don't think there is anything worse than what is down beneath the surface already, such as H2S. This H2S is a very very bad "chemical. H2S is oderless, clear, and super deadly. One breath and you die. Absolutely there are risks to drilling, but there are greater risks in everyday life, and everyone takes those risks as part of living. No, please don't say that these everyday risks are risks that people must take in order to carry out their daily lives because they aren't. Drilling in Southlake is a good thing over all. The revenues will generate a lot of money for the schools and other things to make Southlake a great place to raise a family. I suggest people do their own homework on this subject by asking our neighboring cities who have allowed drilling to take place what they think.

My God Louschell, Haven't you learned anything about "Green" energy after the Solyndra and Evergreen debacle? Both companies went bankrupt because it is too expensive to produce solar energy. Today the news stated that Solyndra's solar panels would generate electral power in the range of .60+cents /Kwh compared to around .05 cents/Kwh with coal fired power plants. Biofuels are in the same boat. There has not been any "break throughs" in these types of energy producers to make producing energy through other means financially viable. Also, drilling is NOT a short term fix. There is enough gas/oil to last centuries if we could get the likes of the "No Drilling" people out of the way and let progress move us.

Oh please! Greed had nothing to do with wanting to harvest what is rightfully the land owners resources. The neighboring cities have drilled gas wells all over their cities and nothing negative has happened. That's right NO flaming water coming out of the faucets in their houses. There is a gas well drilled just immidiately west of Tarrant County College NE and you can't hardly tell it is there. I have seen scare tactics like the ones being used by those against drilling before and it is a shame that people believe those things. I am not saying nothing can happen, but if it does it will not be a major catastrophe. The residents will probably not even know anything happened. I compare the scare tactics used against drilling to be in the same catagory as the Democrats saying babies will die if we cut back aid to dependent mothers--All the while promoting abortions. HA! WHAT A JOKE.

The shale gas industry loves to drill and frack near apartment communities. They sign the mineral leases with the apartment owners who don't live near the industrial activity. The apartment renters may not know about the carcinogens in the air. They certainly won't be told about any of it. I'm certain that those living in Southlake who understand all of this wouldn't wish it on any community.

It's frequently noted (or at least argued) that those who oppose drilling are probably ones who own no mineral rights and thus stand nothing to gain. It's probably not surprising that this observation does not hold true in Southlake. A few thousand bucks per mineral acre and a modest royalty income stream means less the wealthier one is. The affluent can afford to oppose drilling without paying close attention to either its merits or its pitfalls. That doesn't help us answer the question of whether fracking is, in fact, unsafe.

"At the depth of the drilling in the Barnett Shale the chemicls will NEVER come to the surface. If you think so then why isn't the oil/gas coming to the surface?"

Mmmmm, because there isn't currently 5000 lbs per square inch of water pressure down there blowing the ground apart. And because there are no wells/pipes crammed down there trying to bring stuff up to the surface.

@Frank E What matter that the major contributor to air polution in the Ft.Worth area is being created by the natural gas industry ? Just drill baby drill and get all your information from vested interests !

Really do need to re-read your really bad research. They did not go bankrupt because of the reasons you have cited. The O&G Industry doesn't want any of these breakthroughs. Solar is ready to go unless O&G destroys it.

Poor Frank. Try raising a family in an industrial zone. Health effects are already happening throught out our area. Ask some folks about their breathing problems year round in Texas. This drilling procedure is so new, that it may be another 5 years before we begin to realize the long term effects. I'll bet you smoke cigarettes. No? Remember how long it took from the Marlboro man to banning smoking in public spaces?

Nothing negatively has happened? Actually, there have been numerous violations near Tarrant County College site this summer ~ that we know about. Or didn't you hear about Chesapeake trucking Arlington water from a fire hydrant at the Sublett and 360 pad site to the Harvey site in Grand Prairie? You didn't know? There were likely other incidences that weren't caught on camera. So, pay attention, Frank. They were caught by a citizen. Grand Prairie was under water restrictions that included no drilling and no fracking. Even being in a severe drought didn't seem to matter to Arlington or Fort Worth. It's clear that you may be trapped in 2007 ~ when the gas operators moved in to spread their good cheer to neighborhoods and Tommy Lee Jones encouraged everyone to "get on board." Well, it's 2011, Frank, and people are finally starting to realize that turning our neighborhoods into industrial zones was never part of that "get on board," discussion.

There you go again. Frear tactics. There is less carcinogens produced by drilling a gas well than produced by cars driving up and down the streets, or by all the thousands of Southlake residents having their lawns sprayed for insects, or spraying herbicides. The truth is the people of Southlake have a right to drill on their property if they want. The city could stand to make millions of dollars in revenue if drilling was allowed. We have high enough taxes already. Driling is a win win proposition for Southlake residents. Our schools would benefit tremendously with the revenue generated.

No, Frank. The City can make rules to "protect" the citizens from harm. The pollution released by the shale gas drilling is just one of the very harmful effects. Health and enjoyment of your home should trump any amount of money. The gas operators swooped in and handed out money to municipalities, churches and school boards, bought their silence and helped write the Ordinances that "encouraged" drilling.

I doubt very seriously that the industry would like to pit itself against home rule. When push comes to shove, anyway. It's truly a matter of cities determining what kind of businesses and development they want in their jurisdictions. It's all about protecting the citizens. The more and more awareness of all of this...the more difficult it will be. Leaving Southlake is one sign of that change. The "mineral estate" is different in every state. Texas wrote these laws saying the mineral estate was "dominant" early on. Not all states have this same law. Once we move away from the worship of fossil fuels...the "mineral estate" will be a thing of the past. The industry loves to threaten cities with this stuff.

That's funny. Clearly, a college "English" lit teacher with such disdain for a community that has managed to keep shale gas drilling "out," is an English teacher who doesn't keep up with the latest information about all of it. Learning should be a life-long process. Especially for educators. Paradise has many definitions. In the Barnett Shale, "Paradise" is a city that isn't built-out with pad sites. It's a city that doesn't have its citizens living down-wind of multiple pad sites or even one pad site housing the multiple produced water tanks for holding the poisonous water that comes back up from the fracking and must then be periodically "vented" onsite or these tanks will explode; or within a few hundred feet of compressor stations; or surrounded by gas gathering pipelines that criss-cross the community to get the gas to market...which now means it's going overseas as Liquid Natural Gas. Ah, Paradise.

since southlake is not a suburb of my city, i actually have no interest in whether it fracks or does not frack. just a natural revulsion to emotional 'experts,' overly self-focused, all-anglo residents of traffic-clogged former farmland, now filled with bloated houses, surrounded by shopping, whose culture center is a high school football stadium.

Interesting. You must be with the industry. Sounds like a whole lotta sour grapes that there are no "easy" avenues for drilling and fracking in Southlake.

Blaming the city for not having apartments as being some kind of "snobbery," and as being "sanctimonious." It's probably one of the main reasons there is NO fracking and drilling there. Apartment developers are some of the first landowners to lease the minerals...as we've discovered elsewhere.

Southlake, TX has every right to build out their city as they wish...all home rule cities have that power.

Roadblocks for this massive shale gas drilling campaign are always more than welcome in the Barnett Shale since we all drink the same water and we all breathe the same air.